no! Otherwise we would not have so many where hundreds or thousands of people getting killed, like the recent one in Japan. To make real predictions would require knowing the location of all these faults (some kind of map), knowing at what stage each of them is (how much tension there is and what kind of things are preventing the fault from slipping) and how they interact with one another. Even for very carefully studied regions like southern California, we have only a very small fraction of the information that would be needed for true prediction.
based on? they are based on tectonic plate movement.
no time ....
The 2010 Chilean earthquake lasted 90 seconds.
Long Island
There is no requirement for nausea to occur due to an earthquake or any other natural phenomenon.
sometimes they are but not always i believe
according to my research they should be ore accurate in the future
dirty vinger
based on? they are based on tectonic plate movement.
the average earthquake time for long beach depends on how the high or low the magnitude range is.
repetative
the build up on accumulation of pressure .
If you mean distance-yes, if you mean time, not yet.
It is important to known how long an earthquake will last so that scientist will know if there will be a bigger one. The bigger earthquakes are called main-shock.
Predicting earthquakes is quite difficult. Long term predictions are imprecise but possible. They can estimate within 100 or so years when an eruption will occur. They study slip rates, slip magnitudes, and fault history. Short term predictions are precise, but very difficult. It is based on fluid pressure, gas release, changes in magnetic fields, foreshocks, and gaps in earthquake records.
From what I read the most drastic predictions say that it will happen in 50 years, most others give it from 100 to much more. Just depends on who you put your faith in.
dont know,and dont care